Legal Opinion

Hill Medical Corporation v. Wycoff

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 30, 2001No. B134869PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

ALDRICH, J.

Introduction

In this case we are called upon to determine if a covenant not to compete between Hill Medical Corporation (Hill Medical) and Dr. Russell R. Wycoff (Dr. Wycoff) is void pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 16600. Hill Medical has sought an injunction to enforce the covenant against Dr. Wycoff, claiming it falls within the narrow exception set forth in Business and Professions Code section 16601.

The trial court denied Hill Medical’s request for an injunction, concluding the covenant not to compete was unenforceable under section 16600 and did not fall…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Howard v. BabcockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Kolani v. GluskaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  3. Vacco Industries, Inc. v. Van Den BergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  4. Swenson v. FileCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  5. In Re Marriage of FosterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Comedy Club, Inc. v. Improv West AssociatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
  2. Robinson v. U-Haul Co. of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  3. Kelton v. StravinskiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
  4. Strategix, Ltd. v. Infocrossing West, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006
  5. Warner Co. v. SolbergNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API